Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blarg

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete.

Blarg

Dictdef of what is essentially not even a word so much as an emotional onomatopoeia. Tosses in a secondary sense from the Jargon File but that still makes it a dictdef. -- Antaeus Feldspar 00:52, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Comment I ran across this during RC/New Page patrol, I'm not sure if it was never closed out in January or what but this is a different usage of the word. When I added this new page here the old entry populated the entry. I left them here but the old votes are meant for the old page. See Wikipedia:Help_desk#Blarg for more description if you're interested. Rx StrangeLove 03:32, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not notable. Not appropriate to have here instead of on Wiktionary. Not a word. Not much more than advertising or fanboy cruft. Not factually correct in that the "word" has been around for about as long as human vocal system has been capable of producing the necessary sounds. ;) Take your pick; one way or another, this needs to go! —HorsePunchKid→龜 03:52, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Delete. I have been using this word long before 2003 Towel401 14:17, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article has no encyclopedic value at all. The current page lists uses of the word like, BLARG BLARG HONK HONK. What value does this have? The whole page is frivolous and should be deleted or made semi-serious.

Comments below are from the old VfD

Doesn't seem to have any significance, unless it's also some bit of sci-fi fancruft that I don't know (I doubt it would be). Delete or perhaps redirect to metasyntactic variable, since it's listed there. --Idont Havaname 02:56, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I once saw a guy get frustrated and yell "YORG!" at the top of his lungs, but I doubt that would justify an article. Merge the computer-related def with an applicable article and delete the rest. 23skidoo 07:25, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Metasyntactic variable. Megan1967 01:45, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Delete. It's not a metasyntactic variable, so merging it there would lessen the quality of both articles. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 06:36, Jan 17, 2005 (UTC)

New comments

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Delete. Maybe copy to wiktionary if it's acceptable there. →Raul654 03:04, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
Delete; or maybe a redirect (no merge) to Blargg as a misspelling. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:38, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.